World Aids Day: Groups say
Trump failing on HIV fight
NEWS / HIV
INFOGRAPHIC
HIV/AIDS: Fewer
deaths, but infections
still rising
READ MORE
Lesotho taxi drivers
help lead fight against
HIV
READ MORE
Living with HIV: 'There
is nothing to fear'
Aids HIV Health Donald Trump
United State.
A man places a placard as he prepares a
message during an HIV/AIDS awareness
campaign on the eve of World AIDS Day in
Kolkata, India [Rupak De Chowdhuri/Reuters]
While US officials celebrate the work
that has been done for HIV prevention ,
global advocacy groups and activists
warn that US President Donald Trump's
policies and approach may stall any
future progress.
"We honour those who have lost their
lives to AIDS , we celebrate the
remarkable progress we have made in
combatting this disease, and we
reaffirm our ongoing commitment to
end AIDs as a public health threat,"
Trump said in a proclamation, which
did not mention the LGBT community,
marking World AIDS Day.
But thirty-eight advocacy organisations
submitted a letter to congressional
leaders on Friday voicing a "profound
concern about the direction the
executive branch appears to be taking
in the global response to the HIV/AIDS
epidemic ".
The letter referred to Trump's proposed
budget, which would have cut $800m
for programmes like the President's
Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief
(PEPFAR) and the Global Fund to Fight
AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.
The organisations expressed their
"profound concern," saying recent
actions by the Trump administration
have caused them to "doubt the White
House's commitment to fighting the
epidemic".
A report
released this
week by ONE,
a global
advocacy
organisation,
said that the
president's
proposed
budget cut
could have led
to more than four million deaths and 26
million new infections in sub-Saharan
Africa over the next fifteen years if it
had been enacted.
"Slowing US efforts to fight HIV/AIDS
for three years could set the global
response back nine years and squander
much of the $64bn that the US has
invested over that time," the report
said.
Funding from the US has been critical
to combatting HIV/AIDS globally, health
experts and activists say.
Started in 2003 under former President
George W Bush, PEPFAR currently
provides treatment to more than 13
million people globally.
The US is also the biggest donor to the
Global Fund, and has contributed more
than $13bn over the past fifteen years.
Reductions in US foreign aid for these
programmes, advocates say, could do
irreparable damage to stemming the
tide of new infections.
New strategy: 'Risk is enormous'
While the proposed cuts were
ultimately rejected by Congress, which
is yet to pass its final budget, health
experts and advocates say the
administration's shift in strategy on
HIV/AIDS prevention may still have dire
effects for the 36.7 million people living
with HIV.
The PEPFAR
Strategy for
Accelerating
HIV/AIDS
Epidemic
Control
(2017-2020),
announced in September by the US
Department of State, named 13 priority
countries where the US will focus its
HIV/AIDs funding.
These countries are those closest to
bringing the epidemic under control,
but are not necessarily the ones with
the highest rates of infection, advocates
say.
South Africa, the country with the
highest percentage of population
infected with HIV, was left off the list.
Advocates like Brian Honermann of
amFAR, the Foundation for AIDS
Research, worry that with these shifting
priorities and possible budget cuts, the
epidemic could resurge.
"The thing that keeps me up at night is
population growth," he told Al Jazeera,
referring to the massive boom on the
youth population in sub-Saharan Africa,
or the "youth bulge."
The UN estimates that by 2030, there
will be more than 300 million young
people in Africa.
"Even if we've been successful at
reducing the rate of infection, if we
don't stay ahead of the epidemic, the
risk having HIV entrenched in a whole
new generation is enormous,"
Honermann said.
Although the number of deaths each
year due to HIV/AIDS has declined
significantly over the last decade, the
number of cumulative infections
continues to rise .
Honermann said he also worries about
the expansion of the Mexico City Policy,
or the "Global Gag Rule" , which
prohibits foreign NGO's from utilising
other donors' money for provision of or
advocacy for abortion.
While the policy previously only
applied to programmes funded through
USAID, the Trump administration has
expanded it to apply to programmes
funded by PEPFAR.
"Historically,
we've seen this
mean that health
centres lose
funding and shut
down,"
Honermann said.
"And when that happens, we could see
HIV rates going up again as people lose
access to services," he added.
Deborah Birx, the US global AIDS
coordinator and special representative
for global health diplomacy, said in a
press conference on Thursday that
"efficiency and effectiveness" led to
"dramatically increased results" despite
no increase in funding in 2017.
But Ian Koski, director of
communications for ONE, pointed out
that, in the future, the cheapest
programmes may not always be the
most effective.
"There's only so much you can do with
efficiency," he said.
"You can't grow the number of people
added to treatment simply through
efficiencies"
Both Koski and Honermann agreed that
increasing the number of people on
treatment is the most effective way to
keep the virus from spreading.
And while the proposed congressional
budget has kept the funding for now,
Koski said, "that's no guarantee".
Why are British Muslim marriages unprotected by law? FEATURE / ISLAM MUSLIM MARRIAGE IN THE UK 60 percent Muslim marriages religious-only, unregistered 28 percent do not realise Islamic ceremony not legally recognised 66 percent know union has no legal status 50 percent do not intend to have marriage legalised - Source: Channel 4 survey Aina Khan Aina Khan is a journalist focusing on race, faith and identity. She's reading a masters in religion in politics at SOAS. @ ainajkhan United Kingdom Islam Europe, Maureen, right, was not entitled to financial support after her husband Rashid - the father of her child - passed away [Courtesy: Maureen] London, England - When Maureen wed her husband Rashid in a Muslim ceremony in 1973 in Bradford, she knew that should the relationship fall apart, she would not be entitled to share his assets. Her marriage was sanctified in the eyes of God, but in the eyes of the state it was "unregistered", not legal, and so financial protection...
Comments